Following the decision of this Court vide Criminal Appeal No. 132 of 2008 dated 23.07.2010 which dismissed the appeal of the above applicants, the said applicants filed this application for a review by way of Notice of Motion supported by affidavits. The application was made under rule 3(2)(a) of the Court of Appeal Rules. The Respondent raised and argued a preliminary objection on points of law. It argued that the application has been brought under the wrong provisions of the law. She said rule 3(2)(a) which appears to be of 1979 Court of Appeal Rules was not proper because at the time when the application was filed, the Court of Appeal Rules, 2009 were already in force. Second, she said the application offended rule 48(2) of the Rules because the Notice of Motion filed did not substantially conform with Form A in the First Schedule to the Rules. Third, the Notice of Motion did not set out the grounds for a review. That went contrary to rule 66(3) of the Rules. Fourth, the Notice of Motion was not signed as per the requirement of rule 48(2) of the Rules. Fifth, the affidavits of the applicants did not indicate the place where they were sworn. The last point was that the application was filed outside the prescribed time of sixty days as provided under rule 66(3) of the Rules.